How to build for success: prison design and infrastructure as a tool for rehabilitation
24th July 2014

In the third blog of our anniversary series, Marayca Lopez i Ferrer, Senior Corrections Analyst and Planner at US firm CGL/Ricci Greene Associates, explores how forward-thinking architects are moving away from classical models of prison architecture – high perimeter razor-wire topped fences, gloomy undersized concrete cells along narrow corridors – to experiment with innovative spatial concepts which better align the physical plant of correctional facilities with the concept of humane treatment and contemporary priorities of inmate rehabilitation and successful reintegration.
As a penologist and criminologist by education, I have been always committed to the mission of offender’s treatment and rehabilitation. After spending a significant amount of time touring and surveying correctional facilities all over the world, I came to the realization that while it is questionable that the world needs more prisons, it is undeniable that what the world needs are better ones to keep pace with the progress in correctional philosophy and practices. Eight years ago, I left academia and joined a planning and architectural firm specializing in justice facilities, discovering the social dimension of architecture and the power of correctional buildings as an alternative solution to moving current penitentiary systems forward (see note 1).
The importance of any correctional facility’s physical plant to the fulfillment of particular objectives has been long recognized. Historically, correctional facilities have been the architectural expression of competing philosophies of incarceration of the time. In the 18th century, when incarceration was instituted as the primary form of punishment in western societies, the prison itself became the means of punishment. As the prevailing punishment method, early purpose-built correctional design reflected punitive patterns reproducing ideals of enforced solitude and intimidation. Prison reform movements at the end of the century and beginning of the 19th century were also followed by reform-oriented design concepts, with the “separate and silent systems” (Pennsylvania and Auburn models respectively), being two of the first architectural manifestations in which the design of the prison building and the availability of space became a factor impacting the reformative potential of the offenders through isolation and labor, therefore including separate cells and larger spatial configurations where prisoners could work together. Although today’s goals of incarceration have little in common with those of centuries ago, with few exceptions, the architecture of incarceration has remained largely standardized throughout the world: large institutions often located in remote rural areas; stark in appearance, with abundant provision of external symbols announcing the building’s function as a place of confinement, and heavy security features asserting absolute control (i.e. tall perimeters topped with razor wire, visible towers and heavy gates). These are characterized inside by bland uniformity in color and textures, and massive cellblocks holding a large number of individuals in gloomy and undersized concrete cells with steel-barred windows and sliding doors, organized along long, narrow corridors. And needless to say, this model of imprisonment has not only constrained the introduction of rehabilitative ideals but has resulted in negative individual, societal and economic impact.
For the last two decades, in the midst of a world-wide prison population growth, the value of correctional architecture as a catalyst for positive outcomes has pushed forward-thinking architects to reassess classical models, rethink prison designs and experiment with innovative spatial concepts embedded with theories from sociology, psychology, and even ecology. These better align the physical plant of correctional facilities with the concept of humane treatment and contemporary priorities of inmate rehabilitation and successful reintegration.
The purpose of this blog is to contribute to the discussion about the role that modern facility design can achieve in the topic of correctional reform from the perspective of architects and planners, such as myself. To that end, I reached out to experts in the field, including an environmental psychologist, leading justice planners and several architectural firms internationally known for their sensitive and humane approach to prison design, and asked them to describe in a few paragraphs, the optimal spatial attributes of a prison in which architecture and rehabilitative ideals could operate in harmony (see note 2).
It is not practical or viable to design a “one-size-fits-all” correctional facility, since the type of facility ultimately needed will be influenced by variables such as economic and human resources, political climate, location and the biological, emotional and criminogenic characteristics of those who will reside in the center (e.g., gender, age, risk and needs, and legal status). However, presented below are the features that, drawn from culturally diverse viewpoints, were commonly identified as vital in meeting the basic requirements of inmate rehabilitation (see note 3)…
In order for a correctional building to function as a tool for rehabilitation, the design of a correctional facility should:
Be based on the premise that people are capable of change and improvement, with the built environment conveying the message that incarcerated people are worth something, and that they can be trusted to transform their lives from a criminal past to a more constructive future if provided with the social skills and cognitive tools necessary to succeed.
Be based on “evidence-based practices” and consider the results from scientific research conducted in similar institutional settings like hospitals and long-term healthcare centers, which demonstrate the influence of healthy environments in reducing the frequency and severity of anti-social behaviors and violence, and in mitigating stress and anxiety. More specifically, evidence shows the beneficial mental and social aspects in a treatment-oriented environment of access to natural light and fresh air, connectedness to nature, thermal and acoustic comfort, and variety of outdoor spaces and views to experience the changing of seasons.
Make a “good neighbor”: eliminating the stereotypical intimidating image of prisons and the stigma of incarceration is vital to avoid alienation, and for success in rehabilitation. As a public, social institution, where possible, a correctional facility should be integrated in the community to which the prisoner will be released, and blend with the surrounding area. Although a barrier to the outside world is necessary to maintain security, the aesthetic and environmental aim of the facility should deinstitutionalize the building and integrate it into the broader community by presenting a normalized, modern, citizen-oriented appearance and an appropriate scale.
Be right-sized: to carry out a really effective program of rehabilitation, the operational capacity of any correctional facility should never exceed one thousand offenders. The smaller the facility size, the greater the chances for program administrators and facility personnel to get to know many of the inmates personally, their stories, needs, deficits and strengths, and thus better identify effective ways of dealing with them. When held in small enough facilities, inmates may receive more focused attention, programming and individualized treatment. Additionally, evidence-based research shows that large, crowded spaces increase an offender’s sense of isolation and anxiety. Accordingly, to aid in rehabilitation, facilities should be broken down into small units appropriately sized in accordance with security risk and needs. The provision of a variety of housing options (through mixed-custody construction) to satisfy varying degrees of custody as determined by classification requirements, enhances the operation of rehabilitative programs. And to avoid the mixing of inmate groups, each unit should be discrete and self-sufficient, and include both individual as well as a variety of collective spaces where groups of people can congregate to replicate some of the activities they would be engaging in on the outside: cooking, dining, studying, watching television, reading, playing games, and exercising.
Promote safety, security, ease of supervision, and circulation: the demands of security dictate the use of straight-line designs that provide clear sightlines throughout the facility while enhancing way-finding and orientation. At the housing unit level, security through proper supervision is accomplished by organizing the spaces for “direct supervision”, with the officer’s open desk strategically located inside the living area with clear, direct line of sight into the bedrooms (rather than “cells”). Allowing adequate floor space is essential to improve visual openness and make it easier for the officer to see, hear, and supervise inmates. Direct supervision not only aids informal surveillance but also promotes constant, direct interaction and normalized communication between staff and inmates, proactively identifying and addressing potential problems before they escalate. A foundational premise of this approach is that inmates are not confined in their rooms all day, but rather participate in scheduled activities and programming, and are free to move about and use the resources available to them within the housing unit, under less obtrusive security. Allowing inmates a measure of control over their environment results in an environment conducive to change and self-awareness, by encouraging them to manage their own behavior and make responsible choices regarding their participation in daily activities.
Provide a healthy, safe environment: organizations that uplift the morale of those deprived of liberty benefit not only the residents but also staff (who often spend more time in these facilities than the inmates themselves), and the community partners. Spaces that are filled with sunlight, outside views, therapeutic color schemes and normalized materials, encourage inmates’ participation, reduce stress, incidents and assaults and decrease staff absenteeism. The provision of a healthy, safe environment throughout the facility is also essential to encourage community engagement and participation, essential in the success of the rehabilitative mission. Visitors, volunteers and community providers will feel safe if the areas they frequent (eg. public lobby, waiting and visitors’ areas) are welcoming, user-friendly, there is access to daylight, proper ventilation, odors and temperature are controlled and acoustics managed. The same principles apply when designing the administration and staff support spaces, program and service areas, circulation corridors, etc.
Provide a normative (less institutional, more residential-like) and spatially stimulating living environment for occupants: The most effective types of living environments in aiding rehabilitation are those that are domestic in feel and enhance the quality of life. In housing units, a normative, intellectually stimulating environment features abundant sunlight, openness, unobstructed views, landscaping, access to nature, bar-less wood doors and large windows, human scale, movable furniture, normalized materials such as carpet, wood, tempered/shatter-proof glass, commercial grade acoustic lay-in tile low ceiling and acoustic wall panels, functional and home-like furniture, and soft textures and colors: these express calmness, help to ward off monotony and motivate the senses. Additionally, allowing some degree of privacy and personalization are key aspects of the transformation process. Inmates should be entitled to privacy for sleeping, maintenance and personal hygiene, and the safe-keeping of personal items. In turn, personalization of the space should be promoted by, for example, letting inmates personalize their rooms, re-arrange the living area furniture or adjust light fixtures. This promotes a sense of personal dignity and control over the environment, promoting respect for themselves and, in turn, respect for each other.
Be program and services-oriented and provide a variety of spaces: as important as offering inmates a variety of rehabilitation-type programs and services, is the provision of multi-purpose spaces to be used for rehabilitation, such as academic and vocational classrooms, activity and workshop areas, multi-faith space and counseling rooms for both individual and group therapy. Any rehabilitative design should maximize program space, to avoid activities and treatment programs having to compete for the space, therefore compromising inmates’ participation and regular access to programs and services. To encourage positive socialization, movement and the experience of seasonal change, multi-purpose spaces should be spatially organized in a campus-like setting consisting of several stand-alone buildings (rather than a large imposing institution), organized to maximize use of shared resources.
A correctional facility requires a humanizing approach to design that few other kinds of public architecture demand. A new generation of rehabilitation centers should provide spaces that reduce stress, fear and trauma; spaces that stimulate motivation for participation in positive activities that reduce idleness and negative behavior and that, rather than warehouse or isolate inmates, work with them to encourage reformation and reintegration into society as law-abiding citizens. Life inside the secure perimeter of a rehabilitative correctional facility should allow for as much normalcy as possible, providing inmates with a level of responsibility and autonomy that will prepare them for life on the outside, and imposing as few restrictive conditions in spaces, circulation pathways and access to indoor and outdoor spaces as possible. However, for those spatial and environmental considerations and their positive attributes to be of value, they need to go hand- in-hand with positive and constructive inmate management policies, practices and procedures as well as committed, well-trained staff.
Notes
- The broad and generic term of “corrections/correctional facility” includes all types of institutions tasked with housing offenders (eg. jails, prisons, detention centers and juvenile facilities) in this article.
- The author would like to thank the following people and architectural firms for their contribution to this blog: Dr. Richard Wener (Professor of Environmental Psychology at the Polytechnic Institute of New York University), Marjatta Kaijalainen (Finland), Helena Pombares (Angola/UK), Hohensinn Architektur (Austria), Fabre i Torres (Catalonia), PRECOOR SC (Mexico), Parkin Architects Limited (Canada), Jones Studio, Inc. (USA), Jay Farbstein & Associates, Inc. (USA), and CGL/RicciGreene Associates (USA).
- When discussing correctional facilities design, in the interest of brevity, no attempt has been made to differentiate between jails and prisons and juvenile facilities, or institutions of different custody and security levels.
About the author
Dr Marayca López is currently a Senior Corrections analyst and planner for CGL/RicciGreene Associates, a pre-eminent criminal justice planning and design firm based in New York specialising in providing secure and normative environments that promote positive behavioural change and successful re-entry. Having exclusively dedicated her academic and professional careers to the philosophy and practice of prison reform, Marayca is an authority on correctional matters with a deep understanding of correctional facility operations and management. She has participated in correctional projects, both domestically and abroad, contributing to the process of prison reform by providing State and local governments with sustainable, long-lasting criminal justice solutions and right-sized prison infrastructure. Ms. López’s ten years of academic pursuit and practical application in the field of corrections have nurtured and refined her analytical skills, which are critical for criminal justice strategic planning. Her areas of expertise include inmate population analysis, alternatives to incarceration, needs assessments and strategic master planning for criminal justice agencies, and programming of new institutions.
.
About this blog series
To mark our 25th Anniversary and prepare for the Crime Congress in Qatar in April 2015, PRI is running a series of monthly expert guest blogs, addressing interesting current trends and pressing criminal justice challenges in criminal justice and penal reform.
Blogs will be available here on our website and as podcasts on the 25th of each month from May 2014 to April 2015. Read more about the blog series.
Comments
Rob Allen, 04th Aug 2014 at 16:32
Thanks for this very insightful piece Marayca. A couple of questions.
Is there any global organisation that collects and disseminates examples of good practice and research findings in the field of design and construction ?
Do you know if prisoners themselves are ever asked about what they value in terms of infrastructure? Its easy to guess but maybe there would be some surprises.
Finally, do you think we need some more detailed international standards for prison construction in the developing world in particular ? or for particular groups such as young offenders or women ?
Thanks
Rob
EVELYNE BUTICHI, 24th Aug 2014 at 11:40
This is very insightful and Thumbs up. Kindly I wish to enquire if there is any organization that can fund a project on the implementation of the UN-Rules for treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-Custodial Measures for Women Offenders, as an organization we are interested in doing the same.
Thank you.
Evelyne.
Marayca, 26th Aug 2014 at 20:19
Rob, thank you so much for contributing to this blog with your interesting questions. Here are my modest answers:
1) The International Corrections and Prison Association (ICPA) has a “training section” where two prison planning guides are provided for people’s consultation. Additionally, within the ICPA, members of the Planning and Design Committee are working on creating a forum to collect standards and practices for prison planning and design from as many global sources as can be identified, as well as at creating linkages between known prison standards from the USA (American Correctional Association), UK, Australia and other nations and the UN Minimum Rules, ICRC and standards by other organizations and nations that address minimum physical plant guidelines.
However, I think that some of these design/construction minimum standards, besides being extremely vague, are obsolete and need to be revisited in light of modern, evidence-based practices and modern standards of operations drawn from the experience of various countries.
As an example, specific to the size of the cells (very important topic!), while a number of international instruments (i.e. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, European Prison Rules, Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment) provide guidance on minimum space requirements of prison cells/rooms per prisoner, there is no specific figure given to indicate what is considered an acceptable minimum amount of space to be provided for each prisoner. As I see it, there is a need to examine and standardize and globalize critical prison design guidelines.
2) I strongly believe that the planning of any correctional facility should include interviews with the several facility users (e.g. staff, program and services providers and inmates), where operational, programmatic and space requirements for each component of the facility are discussed as part of the programming process. At least this is the approach and methodology that “we” planners at CGL/RicciGreene constantly advocate.
I know of a prison design project called “The Creative Prison Project” that was conducted in England by Rideout in consultation/collaboration with SMS Alsop, Wates Construction Ltd and staff and prisoners of HMP Gartree in Market Harborough, Leicestershire. Information about the project background as well as the prisoners’ views can be found at http://www.rideout.org.uk and http://www.rideout.org.uk/documents/CP_creativethinkingwithintheprisonestate.pdf.
As recently as last Sunday (24/08/2014), the following article was published in the Los Angeles Times: What kind of prison might the inmates design?
(http://www.latimes.com/local/great-reads/la-me-c1-restorative-justice-design-20140818-story.html#page=1)
Coincident with my article in this blog, inmates recognized the value of features such as abundant daylight, views to the exterior, privacy and ample dayroom spaces. Omission of some other features mentioned in my article came as a surprise to me.
3) The social and economical realities of developing countries call for a separate set of guidelines as to provide a realistic and sustainable architectural response. On a similar note, please follow the link below to read the article that one of my colleagues wrote relative to the development of a “prototype prison” that could be quickly and inexpensively constructed in any location following the stabilization of post-conflict:
http://www.aia.org/akr/Resources/Documents/AIAB089212
As I mentioned before, even though international bodies contain some minimum standards applicable worldwide, some of these standards are way too vague and superfluous. In my modest opinion, critical topics need to be identified and developed in greater detail relative to developing (and post-conflict) countries.
Similarly, the design and construction guidelines for juvenile facilities need to be different than those for adults. In this regard, organizations such as the American Correctional Association (ACA) and the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) provide planning and design standards for secure and non-secure juvenile facilities, specifically tailored to address the unique needs of juvenile offenders.
I am of the opinion, that something similar should also be done relative to women’s correctional facilities (historically relegated to correctional afterthoughts). Research shows that the needs of female offenders differ from those of incarcerated men, as well as the manner in which females face their prison experience, therefore being essential that corrections professionals not only recognize and understand the unique needs of female offenders, but also be prepared to address them through gender-responsive prison facilities.
I hope the above has answered your questions and clarified your concerns. Thanks!
Sadi, 28th Mar 2015 at 13:35
Thank you for this great post Marayca.
I am a sixth year architecture student at Oxford School of Architecture – my thesis is based in Detroit. I am proposing a new concept for prison and prison education – Academy Retroit – Working with both non criminals and non-violent offenders Academy Retroit is a scheme which aims to provide positive impacts both socially and financially through various educational programs.
If by any chance you have a minute spare, I would so appreciate your view on this proposal. I have more information on my website: http://sadafpourzand.wix.com/academyretroit
Please feel free to write your view on the comments page. Many thanks! 🙂 🙂
GADE, 30th Apr 2015 at 12:15
Dear Marayca , this is very educative and socially handful write – up. I am a sociologist aiming at proffer means of punishment other than people incarceration. On second years field research now . Hear from me soon.
Mary Marshall, 27th May 2015 at 11:18
Dear Marayca
Thanks for your blog which I found very interesting since I am looking for literature on how design affects behaviour (I am concerned with people with dementia). You mention learning from the design of hospitals where there is evidence. Can you tell me where I would find this evidence? I do not know where to look.
Thanks
Mary
Marayca, 27th May 2015 at 15:30
Dear Mary,
You might want to have a look at classic papers on evidence-based healthcare design conducted in hospital settings by Roger Ulrich, PhD.
For his most recent publications and additional articles, latest publications on this topic, please visit the following links:
https://www.healthdesign.org/chd/research/review-research-literature-evidence-based-healthcare-design
https://www.healthdesign.org/chd/research/role-physical-environment-hospital-21st-century
http://www.takingcharge.csh.umn.edu/explore-healing-practices/healing-environment/what-impact-does-environment-have-us
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nature-that-nurtures/
I hope this helps.
Pooja Kinjawdekar, 23rd Sep 2015 at 06:06
Hi Marayca
your post is great. i am a fifth year student of architecture from india. my thesis is based on reinventing the typology of remand home for juvenile criminals and non criminals in my city Mumbai.
i will be really thankful if you can help me out for any examples to refer for such thesis, anything which can help me understand the psychology of such children. like any arcticles or projects..
Thanks
Stanley Danny Chilembo, 13th Jan 2016 at 08:35
I find this article to be very interesting and educative in sense that it shows the reasons why the structures in prison needed to be designed in a way that will help persons incarcerated to develop positive attitudes.
jane, 02nd Apr 2016 at 07:03
thanks for this article its really nice and it gives great insights for students like me
just one question can you suggest like resources where i can find information regarding net square footage per occupant, or if i can make my own standards as a designer what are the components needed to formulate the area needed per person/occupant
thanks very much
Arshak Gasparyan, 07th Oct 2016 at 11:53
Dear Marayca,
Thanks for interesting and useful links between treatment with prisoners and the construction for them.
I have just 2 technical questions.
1. Is there any counting about the approximately costs for 1 prison for 1000 people
2. I am very much interested in developing an index for safer (or effective) prison for my Country (Armenia). So, can you share any information about any type of questioner and/or other type of tool for monitoring if the Prison is successful in line with rehabilitation activities within the Prison.
Thanks in advance
Parshva Parekh, 13th Dec 2017 at 08:13
Dear Marayca,
Thanks for sharing your perspective in such an interesting way, it was very helpful.
I am an architecture student from India and have taken juvenile correction centre as my final year dissertation topic. I would be grateful if you help me in understanding how architecture affects child psychological.
I’ll be grateful if you can share some references regarding my topic.
Thanks in advance.
Richard Forbes, 27th Apr 2020 at 22:56
Have you considered how creating ideal prison cells could be combined with research for dealing with medical need for social isolation?
HANNAH SPOONER, 16th May 2021 at 09:48
Do you have any advice on a facility that would allow inmates go grow the vegetables that would be served and what isn’t could be sold and income go back into facilty/state??
Merry Poncio, 21st May 2024 at 13:59
Really excellent info can be found on web blog.